Associated Person, Alias Person


Beverly Smallwood
 

Both seem to function to link two person records.

Help files only mention Associated Person under "How to Record Other Types of Relationship" -- I cannot find anything for 'alias'.

What can/should this be used for?

I'm wondering if this is a viable way to link persons who might be the same person - pending proof before merging. 

I'm also interested in how other users link/flag people that might be the same person?

Bev


Mike Tate
 

As it says in the GEDCOM specification:

 

ALIAS ~ An indicator to link different record descriptions of a person who may be the same person.

ASSO ~ An indicator to link friends, neighbors, relatives, or associates of an individual.

 

Neither are particularly well supported in most products including FH.

 


Beverly Smallwood
 

Thanks Mike - I've installed your Assoc tab https://fhug.org.uk/kb/download/associated-persons-3/

I'd like to add one or two Alias links to this but am having trouble figuring it out.
This seems to work for the link:
INDI.ALIA[1]
but is there an associated note that goes with it as there is for Assoc?

I think I might just use Assoc. for Alias as well.






On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 1:15 PM Mike Tate <post@...> wrote:

As it says in the GEDCOM specification:

 

ALIAS ~ An indicator to link different record descriptions of a person who may be the same person.

ASSO ~ An indicator to link friends, neighbors, relatives, or associates of an individual.

 

Neither are particularly well supported in most products including FH.

 


Malcolm Rains
 

Would not Alias be alternative spellings of the name and Associate be a family member or friend at an event?

Malcolm

On Mar 17, 2023, at 3:02 PM, Beverly Smallwood <bevsmallwood@...> wrote:

Thanks Mike - I've installed your Assoc tab https://fhug.org.uk/kb/download/associated-persons-3/

I'd like to add one or two Alias links to this but am having trouble figuring it out.
This seems to work for the link:
INDI.ALIA[1]
but is there an associated note that goes with it as there is for Assoc?

I think I might just use Assoc. for Alias as well.






On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 1:15 PM Mike Tate <post@...> wrote:

As it says in the GEDCOM specification:

 

ALIAS ~ An indicator to link different record descriptions of a person who may be the same person.

ASSO ~ An indicator to link friends, neighbors, relatives, or associates of an individual.

 

Neither are particularly well supported in most products including FH.

 





Beverly Smallwood
 

Well - no.  I have a George Nash in the US who was born in England.  I found a George Nash in England who might be the same man, but no information that confirms this hypothesis has been found.  I prefer to keep these as two individuals, linked with a note explaining the possibilities, similarities and differences.  They share no document or event.

Given the GEDCOM specification Mike listed, I should be using ALIAS to link these men.





On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 2:18 PM Malcolm Rains <mrainsstudio@...> wrote:
Would not Alias be alternative spellings of the name and Associate be a family member or friend at an event?

Malcolm

On Mar 17, 2023, at 3:02 PM, Beverly Smallwood <bevsmallwood@...> wrote:

Thanks Mike - I've installed your Assoc tab https://fhug.org.uk/kb/download/associated-persons-3/

I'd like to add one or two Alias links to this but am having trouble figuring it out.
This seems to work for the link:
INDI.ALIA[1]
but is there an associated note that goes with it as there is for Assoc?

I think I might just use Assoc. for Alias as well.






On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 1:15 PM Mike Tate <post@...> wrote:

As it says in the GEDCOM specification:

 

ALIAS ~ An indicator to link different record descriptions of a person who may be the same person.

ASSO ~ An indicator to link friends, neighbors, relatives, or associates of an individual.

 

Neither are particularly well supported in most products including FH.

 





Tom H
 

On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 12:28 PM, Beverly Smallwood wrote:
Given the GEDCOM specification Mike listed, I should be using ALIAS to link these men.
I'm startled by that interpretation although I recognise that GEDCOM is variously understood and there can be 'legal' constructs that few programs recognise and support. Without the dogged digging into the specs, I asked ChatGPT and it was very clear about ALIA being used for alternate names for the same person with a slight twist in the definition between GEDCOM 5.5 and 7.0. So it recommends two individuals with the possible sameness mentioned in their research notes (RESN) or in the individuals' Notes. Then goes on:
If you want to link the two George Smiths together in some way, you could use the ASSO (Association) tag to indicate that there is a connection between them, such as a possible familial relationship. However, you would need to be careful to ensure that the association is clearly labeled as uncertain or speculative, and you should only use this tag if there is at least some evidence to support the possibility of a connection.
Of course, should you wish to transmit your data to some other system, there is the question whether it supports the ASSO tag.


Lorna Craig
 

Questions often arise about points of interpretation of various Gedom specifications.  Sometimes all that becomes clear is that the spec is genuinely open to different interpretations.  I don't think consulting ChatGPT helps - unless you decide to treat it as the final arbiter in any dispute.  (In which case we could just close down this list and the FHUG forums and refer everyone to ChatGPT !)

On 18/03/2023 13:47, Tom H wrote:

On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 12:28 PM, Beverly Smallwood wrote:
Given the GEDCOM specification Mike listed, I should be using ALIAS to link these men.
I'm startled by that interpretation although I recognise that GEDCOM is variously understood and there can be 'legal' constructs that few programs recognise and support. Without the dogged digging into the specs, I asked ChatGPT and it was very clear about ALIA being used for alternate names for the same person with a slight twist in the definition between GEDCOM 5.5 and 7.0. So it recommends two individuals with the possible sameness mentioned in their research notes (RESN) or in the individuals' Notes. Then goes on:
If you want to link the two George Smiths together in some way, you could use the ASSO (Association) tag to indicate that there is a connection between them, such as a possible familial relationship. However, you would need to be careful to ensure that the association is clearly labeled as uncertain or speculative, and you should only use this tag if there is at least some evidence to support the possibility of a connection.
Of course, should you wish to transmit your data to some other system, there is the question whether it supports the ASSO tag.


Beverly Smallwood
 

I took the opportunity to use the 'Other Relationship' feature on FamilySearch today:

It's a two way link!  I wish FH did this.  If you click on the edit pencil you will see notes, sources and events.  All of this is available from either person's view.





On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 9:52 AM Lorna Craig via groups.io <l.m.craig=ntlworld.com@groups.io> wrote:

Questions often arise about points of interpretation of various Gedom specifications.  Sometimes all that becomes clear is that the spec is genuinely open to different interpretations.  I don't think consulting ChatGPT helps - unless you decide to treat it as the final arbiter in any dispute.  (In which case we could just close down this list and the FHUG forums and refer everyone to ChatGPT !)

On 18/03/2023 13:47, Tom H wrote:
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 12:28 PM, Beverly Smallwood wrote:
Given the GEDCOM specification Mike listed, I should be using ALIAS to link these men.
I'm startled by that interpretation although I recognise that GEDCOM is variously understood and there can be 'legal' constructs that few programs recognise and support. Without the dogged digging into the specs, I asked ChatGPT and it was very clear about ALIA being used for alternate names for the same person with a slight twist in the definition between GEDCOM 5.5 and 7.0. So it recommends two individuals with the possible sameness mentioned in their research notes (RESN) or in the individuals' Notes. Then goes on:
If you want to link the two George Smiths together in some way, you could use the ASSO (Association) tag to indicate that there is a connection between them, such as a possible familial relationship. However, you would need to be careful to ensure that the association is clearly labeled as uncertain or speculative, and you should only use this tag if there is at least some evidence to support the possibility of a connection.
Of course, should you wish to transmit your data to some other system, there is the question whether it supports the ASSO tag.


Edward Sneithe
 

I'm just staring to read about GEDCOM 7. Any idea if and when  FH will incorporate into FH

On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 02:26:25 PM EDT, Beverly Smallwood <bevsmallwood@...> wrote:


I took the opportunity to use the 'Other Relationship' feature on FamilySearch today:

It's a two way link!  I wish FH did this.  If you click on the edit pencil you will see notes, sources and events.  All of this is available from either person's view.





On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 9:52 AM Lorna Craig via groups.io <l.m.craig=ntlworld.com@groups.io> wrote:

Questions often arise about points of interpretation of various Gedom specifications.  Sometimes all that becomes clear is that the spec is genuinely open to different interpretations.  I don't think consulting ChatGPT helps - unless you decide to treat it as the final arbiter in any dispute.  (In which case we could just close down this list and the FHUG forums and refer everyone to ChatGPT !)

On 18/03/2023 13:47, Tom H wrote:
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 12:28 PM, Beverly Smallwood wrote:
Given the GEDCOM specification Mike listed, I should be using ALIAS to link these men.
I'm startled by that interpretation although I recognise that GEDCOM is variously understood and there can be 'legal' constructs that few programs recognise and support. Without the dogged digging into the specs, I asked ChatGPT and it was very clear about ALIA being used for alternate names for the same person with a slight twist in the definition between GEDCOM 5.5 and 7.0. So it recommends two individuals with the possible sameness mentioned in their research notes (RESN) or in the individuals' Notes. Then goes on:
If you want to link the two George Smiths together in some way, you could use the ASSO (Association) tag to indicate that there is a connection between them, such as a possible familial relationship. However, you would need to be careful to ensure that the association is clearly labeled as uncertain or speculative, and you should only use this tag if there is at least some evidence to support the possibility of a connection.
Of course, should you wish to transmit your data to some other system, there is the question whether it supports the ASSO tag.


Vyger
 


On Sat, 18 Mar 2023, 19:34 Edward Sneithe via groups.io, <truthfor16=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
I'm just staring to read about GEDCOM 7. Any idea if and when  FH will incorporate into FH

On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 02:26:25 PM EDT, Beverly Smallwood <bevsmallwood@...> wrote:


I took the opportunity to use the 'Other Relationship' feature on FamilySearch today:

It's a two way link!  I wish FH did this.  If you click on the edit pencil you will see notes, sources and events.  All of this is available from either person's view.





On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 9:52 AM Lorna Craig via groups.io <l.m.craig=ntlworld.com@groups.io> wrote:

Questions often arise about points of interpretation of various Gedom specifications.  Sometimes all that becomes clear is that the spec is genuinely open to different interpretations.  I don't think consulting ChatGPT helps - unless you decide to treat it as the final arbiter in any dispute.  (In which case we could just close down this list and the FHUG forums and refer everyone to ChatGPT !)

On 18/03/2023 13:47, Tom H wrote:
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 12:28 PM, Beverly Smallwood wrote:
Given the GEDCOM specification Mike listed, I should be using ALIAS to link these men.
I'm startled by that interpretation although I recognise that GEDCOM is variously understood and there can be 'legal' constructs that few programs recognise and support. Without the dogged digging into the specs, I asked ChatGPT and it was very clear about ALIA being used for alternate names for the same person with a slight twist in the definition between GEDCOM 5.5 and 7.0. So it recommends two individuals with the possible sameness mentioned in their research notes (RESN) or in the individuals' Notes. Then goes on:
If you want to link the two George Smiths together in some way, you could use the ASSO (Association) tag to indicate that there is a connection between them, such as a possible familial relationship. However, you would need to be careful to ensure that the association is clearly labeled as uncertain or speculative, and you should only use this tag if there is at least some evidence to support the possibility of a connection.
Of course, should you wish to transmit your data to some other system, there is the question whether it supports the ASSO tag.


Paul Tanner-Tremaine
 

Vyger,  FH has not yet integrated the Gedcom 7 standard.  As far as I am aware, they have NOT included the new structures, Tags, etc that will become available with a true gedcom7 file.  Start a new project in v7.19 and then check the 2 VERS tag which still indicates Gedcom version 5.5.1.
see also https://gedcom.io/migrate/
They may have catered for exporting to a Gedcom 7 file, and reading from one, with conversions to and from the V5.5.1 specs and warnings about what may get lost.
However, they now do allow to import and export using the new GEDZIP formats, which in reality are your regular or host gedcom 5.5.n files, and all associated media files into a generic gdz Zip file.  It saves you doing this manually.
My standard gedcom is 80,976 KB, Media folders 1.87GB in size and the gedcom7 gdz results in a 1,762,427 KB file. I think regular ftp programs may timeout with a file that big!


Vyger
 

Paul,

Thank you, I guessed that but have not tested it.

There is a lot of buzz around the Rootsmagic 9 release and the company describing a new feature of Associations. As I understand it these Associations are essentially Witness events under a different name?

The defacto tag of _SHAR was widely accepted by many genealogy applications but now the ASSO is accepted GEDCOM and I think was so in 5.5.1.

I'm interested to see if future GEDCOM 7 exports will essentially convert the _SHAR tag to ASSO or will the defacto _SHAR tag continue to co exist.

Time will tell.

Jackson


On Tue, 21 Mar 2023, 17:19 Paul Tanner-Tremaine, <paul@...> wrote:
Vyger,  FH has not yet integrated the Gedcom 7 standard.  As far as I am aware, they have NOT included the new structures, Tags, etc that will become available with a true gedcom7 file.  Start a new project in v7.19 and then check the 2 VERS tag which still indicates Gedcom version 5.5.1.
see also https://gedcom.io/migrate/
They may have catered for exporting to a Gedcom 7 file, and reading from one, with conversions to and from the V5.5.1 specs and warnings about what may get lost.
However, they now do allow to import and export using the new GEDZIP formats, which in reality are your regular or host gedcom 5.5.n files, and all associated media files into a generic gdz Zip file.  It saves you doing this manually.
My standard gedcom is 80,976 KB, Media folders 1.87GB in size and the gedcom7 gdz results in a 1,762,427 KB file. I think regular ftp programs may timeout with a file that big!


Mike Tate
 

Jackson,

I suggest you need to become more familiar with the GEDCOM 7.0 and 5.5.1 specifications.

Although ASSO is a valid tag in GEDCOM 5.5.1 (and earlier) it is only allowed at the Individual record level to link two Individuals.

In GEDCOM 7.0 it is now also allowed at the Fact level similar to the de facto _SHAR shared Witness.

However, the ASSO subsidiary ROLE tag is more formally defined than the _SHAR subsidiary ROLE tag.

So it is not as simple as just substituting _SHAR with ASSO.

See my posting in the FHUG Importing and Exporting Forum on FH import/export GEDCOM 7 issues:

https://www.fhug.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=21665

 


Vyger
 

Thanks Mike,

I have to confess to not having studied the possibilities here. I will read your forum post later but from this post it would appear ASSOciation will remain distinct and is not currently catered for in FH.

Thanks again for your expert opinion.

Jackson


On Tue, 21 Mar 2023, 20:57 Mike Tate, <post@...> wrote:

Jackson,

I suggest you need to become more familiar with the GEDCOM 7.0 and 5.5.1 specifications.

Although ASSO is a valid tag in GEDCOM 5.5.1 (and earlier) it is only allowed at the Individual record level to link two Individuals.

In GEDCOM 7.0 it is now also allowed at the Fact level similar to the de facto _SHAR shared Witness.

However, the ASSO subsidiary ROLE tag is more formally defined than the _SHAR subsidiary ROLE tag.

So it is not as simple as just substituting _SHAR with ASSO.

See my posting in the FHUG Importing and Exporting Forum on FH import/export GEDCOM 7 issues:

https://www.fhug.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=21665